JUDGMENT :

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J.

1. By this common order, CWP Nos. 730 and 775 of 2018 are being taken up together for disposal with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, as the issue involved in the aforesaid matters is identical.

2. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being extracted from CWP No. 730 of 2018.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, while narrating the facts of the present case, submitted that the petitioner is an educational and social welfare trust which had purchased a property by way of Sale Deed No. 2458 dated 01.10.2002, which was duly registered in accordance with law. However, no stamp duty was paid at the time of registration of the aforesaid sale deed in view of the exemption granted by the State of Punjab vide Annexure P-6, which comprises two separate notifications.

4. While referring to the aforesaid notification issued by the Government of Punjab, Department of Revenue and Rehabilitation (Stamps), dated 20.02.1981, it is submitted that the same was issued by the State of Punjab in exercise of powers conferred under Clause (ii) of Sub- section (i) of Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), whereby the duty chargeable on instruments of sale or gift executed in favour of a charitable institution was remitted. Therefore, no stamp duty was required to be charged under the provisions of the Act. Similarly, for the purpose of charging registration fee another notification was issued on the same date i.e. 20.02.1981, vide Annexure P-6 (colly), in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 78 and 79 of the Registration Act, 1908, whereby it was provided that no registration fee shall be chargeable on instrument of sale or of gift executed in favour of a charitable institution. He further submitted that, in this manner, exemption was granted both from payment of stamp duty and registration fee under the respective enactments by way of issuance of appropriate notifications in accordance with law. Therefore, at the time of execution of the sale deed on 01.10.2002, since the aforesaid notifications issued in the year 1981 were in force, neither stamp duty was paid nor registration fee was charged, which was perfectly in accordance with law.

5. He further submitted that after a period of about nine years, a notice was issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector (A.D.C.), Fatehgarh Sahib to the petitioner on 23.05.2011 vide Annexure P- 1, calling upon the petitioner to present his case in view of the fact that stamp duty with regard to the aforesaid land has not been paid and seeking recovery of adequate stamp duty under the Act. He submitted that aforesaid notice was assailed by the petitioner by filing an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, which was allowed by the said Commissioner vide order dated 03.10.2012 (Annexure P-2) on the ground of limitation.

6. While referring to the aforesaid order dated 03.10.2012 (Annexure P-2), learned Senior Counsel submitted that it was observed by the Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, that the impugned notice had been issued after more than eight years from the date of registration of the sale deed and was thus time-barred. Reference was made to the provisions of Section 47-A(3) of the Act, which provide that no proceedings for recovery of deficient stamp duty can be initiated beyond a period of three years from the date of registration. In this manner, the appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed on the ground of limitation and the notice issued to the petitioner was set aside. Thereafter, in the year 2013 i.e. after about eight months the State of Punjab again initiated proceedings under Section 47-A of the Act before the Collector, District Fatehgarh Sahib. However, the Collector, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide order dated 11.06.2013 (Annexure P-3), observed that Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, had already adjudicated